Springfield Public Schools is launching a new teacher evaluation system for the first time in more than 30 years.

And, for the first time, student achievement will play an integral role.

But, unlike a proposed Missouri constitutional amendment on the Nov. 3 ballot, the pilot wouldn't translate into a specific score on the evaluation. It also wouldn't outweigh other aspects in the final analysis of a teacher's performance.

Amendment 3 would require, among other things, that student test scores comprise a majority, at least 51 percent, of a teacher's evaluation.

Springfield officials believe the district's pilot, based heavily on a model endorsed by the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, is a balanced approach that focuses on teachers' professional growth.

"We will look at student achievement, but it is an input to the evaluation process, it's not a hard formula," said Parker McKenna, chief human resources officer. "We are looking at student data and it can be a bunch of things, not just test scores. It can be portfolios that are created or a random sampling for student work selected by an administrator."

All Missouri districts are required, as part of the state's No Child Left Behind waiver, to integrate student achievement into evaluations "in a significant way" by the 2015-16 year. This year's pilot will build up to that.

"We have to do it right," McKenna said. "We have to do it in a way that makes sense for Springfield and that balances all of the things we know about teacher performance."

In mid-August, McKenna asked the board to spend $170,000 for a new software program that would improve the data collection needed for the evaluation system. If approved, it would cost about $77,670 annually in future years.

He said those were the only "hard costs" for the new approach. The rest has been staff time and research.

Training on the new evaluation system starts in September.

Cowden Elementary teacher Ashlie Taylor has mixed feelings about student achievement being part of her report card.

"So much depends on the motivation of the kids. What if the kid doesn't want to learn? I feel like we should be judged on how well we teach the material," said Taylor, in her third year.

"I think test scores should be looked at for student growth, not part of the evaluation."

Use of student scores may grab headlines, but McKenna explained the overhaul includes a lot of other changes.

The former assessment was more global and tied to the needs of the school or the district. The new one is based on the strengths and weaknesses of each teacher.

Working together, a teacher and principal will identify up to three areas that need work. A broad job review will be done at the end of the year but go in depth on those areas.

"We know everyone can improve in some area," he said. "Even a master teacher who has been doing the job for 20 years can improve."

Glenda Thurlkill, president of Springfield's chapter of the Missouri State Teachers Association, said she likes that teachers will have input in what they work on each year. She said this process is a step up.

"The current instrument is very vague," said Thurlkill, who works at Campbell Elementary. "This is more specific to inform a teacher of their strengths and room for improvement."

Thurlkill said clarity is needed on what student data will be used to assess specialty teachers, such as art and music, as well as those in the earliest grades where fewer assessments are given.

She also expressed support for the district's approach, to look at multiple parts of student performance and not just a single test score such as the once-a-year Missouri Assessment Program, or MAP, exams.

"One indicator is not an accurate picture," she said.

Cowden Principal Cherie Norman said the revamped evaluation puts the emphasis on student and teacher growth.

"I'm excited in the manner in which we're changing. We have done it for children, but we have also done it for teachers," Norman said. "It's about growing as a professional, not about checking off what we've done."

Springfield has 1,700 teachers and 65 percent are tenured, meaning they've worked six or more years in the classroom. Teachers have to be evaluated annually during the first five years of working and once every five years during tenure.

McKenna would like to see the five-year cycle for experienced teachers shrink but has yet to propose a shorter interval.

"You've got to provide that regular feedback on a more frequent basis," he said.

What if a teacher doesn't make enough progress on the goals? McKenna said the process will stay the same.

He said while some concerns "are more urgent," teachers are almost always given time and extra resources to improve in an area that is not meeting expectations.

Less than 1 percent of teachers are currently on a performance plan, which includes prescribed steps.

"We would expect to see that the teacher is implementing the strategies they have agreed upon with their evaluation, that they are working and investing of themselves in their own improvement," he said. "If we're seeing that and we're seeing that the teacher is working toward that goal, we almost always do ultimately see improvement."

Evaluation time line

A seven-step process has been developed to evaluate Springfield teachers. Returning teachers are handled a little differently, and not all are required to be evaluated annually. New teachers can expect the following process:

Step 1 Identify up to three performance "indicators" to be assessed this year. They will be based on student data and aligned to school and district improvement plans or the district's strategic plan. Scheduled for August and September.

Step 2 Determine a baseline score, or starting point, for each identified indicator. Scheduled for September and October.

Step 3 Develop an Educator Growth Plan, which includes the practice and application of new knowledge and skills. Scheduled for October and November.

Step 4 Regularly assess progress and provide feedback. Scheduled for November through February.

Step 5 Determine a follow-up score for each identified indicator and determine the overall progress on the Educator Growth Plan. Scheduled for February.

Step 6 Complete the final evaluation to determine the overall performance rating by March 15.

Step 7 Reflect and plan. Continue to monitor student growth and reflect on progress and growth. Indicators for next year may be selected, at this time, based on student data and the results of the evaluation process. Scheduled from April through the summer.

STANDARDS

Springfield teachers will be evaluated based on seven standards. As part of the evaluation, each one will be rated as an area of concern, a growth opportunity or a "meets expectation."

• Content knowledge aligned with appropriate instruction. For example: Students demonstrate mastery and application of content.

• Student learning growth and development. For example: Students' level of growth and development is the foundation of new learning.

• Curriculum implementation. For example: Students master essential learning objectives based on state and district standards.

• Critical thinking. For example: Students demonstrate the ability to think critically and solve problems.

• Positive classroom communication. For example: Students are self-directed, exhibit positive relationships and are engaged in learning.

• Student assessment and data analysis: For example: Students are knowledgeable of their own progress and plan personal learning goals.

How much will this cost?

Development of the new teacher evaluation process has been in the works for several years. The most expensive piece of the puzzle is the technology piece, which makes will include the performance evaluation, identifying future leaders, planning for staff development and tracking professional growth.

At the school board's Aug. 12 study session, the administration recommended the district enter into a contract with Cornerstone OnDemand to provide the "technology platform" the would support the district's "talent management strategy." It could be voted on as early as Tuesday.

If approved, the software and related services would cost $170,000 the first year and $77,670 annual for up to five years. The initial contract would be for three years with two optional one-year renewals.

District officials said the demand for tracking data to make this successful is significant enough that new technology is needed. This company has provided the same service to other large school systems.